From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] rte_mempool_dump() crashes with NULL rte_mempool pointer. Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2014 15:36:45 +0200 Message-ID: <8437457.lrG762lvxy@xps13> References: <05E7C1C5-2730-4BE3-B808-6F69821F7898@windriver.com> <20140928122706.GB30445@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org To: "Wiles, Roger Keith" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20140928122706.GB30445-bi+AKbBUZKY6gyzm1THtWbp2dZbC/Bob@public.gmane.org> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org Sender: "dev" 2014-09-28 08:27, Neil Horman: > On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 05:28:44AM +0000, Wiles, Roger Keith wrote: > > Check the FILE *f and rte_mempool *mp pointers for NULL and > > return plus print out a message if RTE_LIBRTE_MEMPOOL_DEBUG is enabled. > > > > Signed-off-by: Keith Wiles > > I'm fine with this, as I think passing in a NULL mempool is clearly a bug here, > thats worth panicing over, though I wouldnt mind if we did a RTE_VERIFY_WARN > macro here instead using what I suggested in my other note Passing a NULL mempool to rte_mempool_dump() is a bug in the application. If you look elsewhere in the DPDK code, you'll see that it's not common to do such check on input parameters. A similar discussion already happened few months ago: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-June/003900.html -- Thomas